The Myth of the Personally Pro-Life Catholic

I was wondering something tonight in light of the news that Congress will be investigating Planned Parenthood. Are there really Catholics who are personally pro-life and publicly pro-choice? Is that an honest opinion? The answer, if you can call it that, came to me in the form of a question. Have I ever seen or heard of personally pro-life Catholics praying in front of abortion clinics?

Nope.

Have I seen personally pro-life Catholics pushing to hold Planned Parenthood or other abortionists to higher safety standards?

Nope.

But the truth is that to be pro-anything it can not be a passive stance. It must be active or it can’t be described as “pro,” can it?

In the political sphere, there’s plenty of so-called personally pro-life Catholics like Rudy Giuliani. He’s so personally pro-life that he’s donated to Planned Parenthood.

But it ain’t just Rudy. These names ring a bell? Kerry, Schwarzenegger, Dodd, Durban, Leahy, Mikulski, Pelosi, Delahunt, Capuano, Markey, Murkowski, Casey, Collins, McGovern, Meehan, Granholm, Sebelius, Pataki, Pelosi, Richardson, Cellucci, Cuomo, Kucinich, Rangel, and Biden. All “personally pro-life Catholics.” And there’s lots more. You ever hear any of them talk at length about abortion being the taking of a human life? Any of them? We see plenty of evidence for the publicly pro-choice part but little to back up the personally pro-life part.

Cardinal Arinze was quoted as saying:

“Some…say I am personally not in favor of abortion, but I will not impose my views on others. It is like saying, I am personally not in favor of killing you….But since some people want to shoot all of you in the Senate and the House of Representatives, I won’t impose my views on them, it is pro-choice!

“You are not serious! This is Divine Law, it’s not a tennis club regulation.”

The personally pro-life but publicly pro-choice argument, as far as I can make out, is there’s a tiny human being in the womb but don’t want to tell you that you can’t kill that tiny human being because you don’t believe it’s a human being. Or something.

They seem to love classifying abortion as a religious issue and insist they can’t force their religion on others because of the separation of church and state (a pretend benchmark). But of course that’s a bunch of hooey.

The fact is that life begins at conception. That’s science folks. The pro-aborts are the ones who want everyone to come up with their own timeline as far as this yet another pretend benchmark they call “personhood.” So to them, the right of individual personhood granting ability supersedes any right to life.

Here’s the thing - I don’t believe in “personally pro-life.” Not anymore. It just strains credulity. Either you believe it’s the taking of a human life or you don’t. There’s no middle ground. Either you believe in the right to life or you don’t.

Personally pro-life is a tactic, not a position. And it should be called out. When the next 40 Days for Life rolls around, call some personally pro-life Catholics you know and ask them to come with you because you know how strong their “personal” commitment is. Or offer them a pro-life bumber sticker saying something like “Abortion stops a beating heart” for their personal hybrid car. Watch their lips curl and react as if you just handed them a rodent.

Personally pro-life is, at best, neutral about life, in which case you just don’t care about protecting life. As Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel wrote, “We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” If you’re making a distinction between personally pro-life and publicly pro-choice you’re indistinguishable from the oppressors.

Comments

I agree with you Grey Bear. There are a few brave holy Bishops & Priests who speak up and do the right thing, but far too many in my opinion are cowards and tied to the Democratic party. I have been in the Respect Life Ministry at my parish for many years and we beg our priests & deacons every year to please say something on abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, embryonic stem cell research, IVF, chastity, etc. during October (respect life month) and Jan (roe vs wade). Once in awhile they will mention the word abortion, but most likely they have to tie it in with their “seamless garment”/ social justice laundry list. I do NOT give to the CCHD.

I pray for our Bishops, Priests & Deacons to stop with the “PC”/ not offending someone attitude and just speak the truth.

‘‘I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingly power: proclaim the word; be persistent whether it is convenient or inconvenient; convince, reprimand, encourage through all patience and teaching. For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity, will accumulate teachers and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths” (2 Timothy 4:1-4).

Posted by Grey Bear on Thursday, Sep 29, 2011 2:20 PM (EST):

The party of death & their social justice (Communism), just like the “seamless garment” trash, is definitely the fault of our misguided Bishops & Priests. It was a Jesuit who advised the Catholic-in-name-only politicians to use this filthy lie (personally pro-life). The Bishop of Albany, N.Y. is a prime example of ineptitude & malfeasance !

The USCCB has for over 40 years let the annual CCHD collection be distributed to Pro-Abortion, left-wing (Communist) & anti-Catholic groups. Yearly, 15% of that collection goes to the IAF, Industrial Areas Foundation. The IAF runs schools for radicals that train “community organizers”, which trained, employed & aided the current occupant of the oval office, the most PRO-ABORTION politician ever. Last year, only a hand full of the over 240 Bishops in the USA had the courage to STOP this annual fraud in their respective Diocese. We have a responsibility to protest sin, to decry the slaughter of babies, to abhor the homosexual agenda & to hold our Bishops & Pastors to account !

Posted by rover serton on Thursday, Sep 29, 2011 11:04 AM (EST):

Sorry GHU, Planned Parenthood is just an easy mark. Ending them wouldn’t stop abortion. You were and are used by the Republicans as easy votes and they will never let abortion become nationally illegal. The Repubs will also use SSM but will lose young people because of it. Red States will keep making it more and more restrictive to play to the sheeple.

You ignored my SCOTUS point. THEY are the only group that can stop abortion. Period. Pray all you want for 40 days but all you need is 5 votes.

Posted by Joe Wetterling on Thursday, Sep 29, 2011 10:45 AM (EST):

We all know how to interpret this in any other arena besides politics.

“I am opposed to X, but I’m not going to stop X from happening.” Anyone saying that from any other walk of life is lazy, lying, or cowardly.

I don’t think my son should run into traffic, but I’m not going to actually run after him. I don’t think my patient should get this treatment, but I’m not going to advise them. I don’t think my client should invest in this stock, but I’m going to process it anyway. I don’t think this product is right for my customer, but I’m going to sell it to them anyway.

Do people do this? Of course. But we know it isn’t right. We know that acting contrary to your conscience is wrong - except in politics, for some reason. Quite strange.

Posted by GHU on Thursday, Sep 29, 2011 10:38 AM (EST):

sorry “rover” but because of Obama & the Democrats we are using more of our taxpayer money for abortions in the USA AND around the world. Do I think Republicans could do more…..Yes, but remember when Boehner and Republicans in the House tried to defund Planned Parenthood? ..........Obama and Reid both stated they would “shut the government down” before defunding their sacred cow…..Planned UN-Parenthood! (just one example of the wonderful Party of Death….and don’t forget their decreasing conscience rights & push for “gay Marriage”)
Pelosi IS Scarrrrrrry!

Posted by Sam Schmitt on Thursday, Sep 29, 2011 10:36 AM (EST):

Here’s the thing - I don’t believe in “personally pro-life.” Not anymore.

Is there anyone who ever really believed it? It was a sham from the get-go.

Posted by rover serton on Thursday, Sep 29, 2011 9:08 AM (EST):

sorry, fact is, Republicans need to keep abortion legal so they can scare the flock into voting for them as “values voters”. If they got rid of abortion, they would lose on the real social issues, healthcare, job creation, social support.

A republican house right now has proposed NO legislation but will harass Planned Parenthood to look like they are doing good.

Bush43 played you like a fiddle. Got elected and ignored you.

Posted by rover serton on Thursday, Sep 29, 2011 9:05 AM (EST):

Why don’t you ever go after the real power. You have 6 Catholics on the supreme court. NAME NAMES of who is keeping abortion legal and ex-communicate him if you dare to. You name Pols but the real power that enables the practice is the SCOTUS.

If you have the wish to change this, Name Names!

Pelosi is just the republican boogie man so she is named twice. Scarrrrrry!

Posted by David J. White on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 6:55 PM (EST):

No other ‘right’ that I am suppose to have (with the possible exception of the right to a fair trial) is facilitated as much by the state.

This was part of U.S. Grant’s argument, in his memoirs, for why slavery was such a big political problem. Being “pro-choice” on slavery (the Southern position) essentially required that the Federal government get involved in protecting the institution, e.g., with the Fugitive Slave Law. This showed Northerners that it was impossible for them to be “personally anti-slavery” but oppose the mandatory abolition of slavery: thanks to the Fugitive Slave Law (upheld by the Dred Scott decision), Northerner were legally obligated to assist in the return of runaway slaves. This showed that Abolitionists were right, that the only way to keep slavery from spreading was to abolish it entirely, because its continued existence anywhere in the country required the Federal Government to get actively involved in the business of protecting it. Perhaps, as we are seeing, the same may be true for abortion.

***
I agree that putting the onus on parish priests to challenge individual communicants at the Communion rail is perhaps going too far. But why haven’t more bishops publicly challenged “pro-choice” politicians to exercise their own conscience and responsibility and refrain from presenting themselves for Communion? Perhaps it would have little practical effect, but at least then the bishops would be on public record, and perhaps some people would be affected by their conscience. After all, it’s the bishops’ job to proclaim Catholic teaching publicly.

Posted by Thomas on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 6:42 PM (EST):

Be carefull, Life does begin at conception both Biologically and spirit and soul. God bless, Dr Thomas

Posted by Augusta Mia on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 6:32 PM (EST):

Life does not “begin at conception.”

However, human life does have a biological beginning…whether at conception, fertilization, or in a test tube or petri dish.

The difference is crucial to the child whose life begins with God’s beautiful gift of marital union between one man and one woman.

Or if that child is “created” in a science lab as a commodity, and no one is pregnant.

“We must defend each child, regardless of the method of reproduction, including all natural twins and children created through technology, so that the term “person” applies to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.” [prolifeprofiles.com/american-life-league]

We are already in a “brave” new world. Language matters.

Posted by Wendi on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 5:33 PM (EST):

@TRS…you should be proud. You did a good thing and perhaps gave someone else the courage to stand up for the unborn another time.

Posted by Chris on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 3:40 PM (EST):

@ Christina
I think Matthew included Pelosi twice, because she’s twice as bad as any of the other politicians on the list…. :)

@BillG

You seem to be mistaken Bill.

Dr. Paul is opposed to abortion and thinks it should be banned. He also believes that the federal government does not have the consitutional authority to ban abortion, which means that it is up to the individual states to prohibit it.

While it is worth debating whether the federal government actually has the authority to nationally prohibit abortion or not, (and I suspect it may), I think Dr. Paul’s stance on getting the federal government out of the issue would do far more good, far faster than the pathetic incremental “successes” of Republican politicians, or the vain hope of getting Roe v Wade overturned sometime in the next 100 years.

The myopic fixation on the Supreme Court of many pro-lifers fails to realize that even if Roe v Wade were overturned tomorrow, the entire issue would return to the individual states to decide for themselves. While not a “national ban”, if states were allowed to restrict abortion as each chose to do, we would see an immediate decline in the number of babies killed each year, as most states would very likely implement significant restrictions on the practice.

This would reduce the overall number of abortions far faster than any other method, including the current “1/4 of one percent” changes in government funding, or banning killing babies one way, while allowing people to keep killing the same babies in other ways.

In the meantime, we need to worry less about judges, and more about changing the current narcissistic culture that tolerates, if not encourages, abortion.

God bless, all.

Posted by Jen on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 2:27 PM (EST):

Hey, great article but please no more hating on hyrbid cars or other environmentally conscious choices - my friends and I are Catholic, all work for the church and are participating in 40 Days to Life next week and we’re going in *gasp* a hybrid car. So sick of all the silly references I frequently find (especially in Catholic/Christian circles) associating eco-friendliness with extremely liberal people. Open minds, please.

Posted by Thomas on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 2:23 PM (EST):

There is no choice but life. You can not change hardened minds you must change hearts. Our leaders should however always use the bully pulpit to put forward the value of life always . Not only that of the unborn but those who face capital punishement. We must be consistent on all life issues. God bless and as always love ,Pax. Dr Thomas

Posted by MarylandBill on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 2:02 PM (EST):

Well, as I pointed out, I never did embrace the position, and I was more confused than I am now. Essentially, to argue the position, you have to argue that the state does not necessarily define a citizen as someone not yet born, and then when an issue of competing rights arises, it favors a citizen over a non-citizen. —
It of course ignores the fact that state has a duty to protect the most fundamental rights of not only its citizens, but also of all other persons within its borders. —
It was that thought, along with just how awful abortion is that always kept me in the pro-life camp.

Posted by Peter Rother on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 1:52 PM (EST):

Matt,
This post is O-U-T-S-T-A-N-D-I-N-G! (That was surprisingly difficult to type) Thank you for illustrating the abject hypocrisy of the “personally pro-life” crowd.

Pete
P.S. My wife and I both believe that your 3-year-old daughter’s clothes at the pro-life rally match. (After 25 years of marriage, we still find things to agree on).

Posted by JoAnna on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 1:49 PM (EST):

“I think it might be possible to personally pro-life but believe that politically the state should not get involved in the issue.”

My response to that argument is, “You don’t believe that state should be involved in preventing or stopping the murder of its citizens?”

Posted by Lenchoy2k on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 1:33 PM (EST):

Our Lord said it best:

Mt. 21:28-32
Jesus said to the chief priests and elders of the people:
“What is your opinion?
A man had two sons.
He came to the first and said,
‘Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.’
He said in reply, ‘I will not, ‘
but afterwards changed his mind and went.
The man came to the other son and gave the same order.
He said in reply, ‘Yes, sir, ‘but did not go.
Which of the two did his father’s will?”
They answered, “The first.”
Jesus said to them, “Amen, I say to you,
tax collectors and prostitutes
are entering the kingdom of God before you.
When John came to you in the way of righteousness,
you did not believe him;
but tax collectors and prostitutes did.
Yet even when you saw that,
you did not later change your minds and believe him.”

Posted by MarylandBill on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 1:30 PM (EST):

I am going to play devil’s advocate here for a moment. I think it might be possible to personally pro-life but believe that politically the state should not get involved in the issue. Indeed, in a period in my life where I was more confused, I thought long and hard about that position (I never embraced it). —
Now here is the kicker though, pro-choice in this country does not really mean that the state should stay out of the issue. It means holding to the idea that the state should do all it can to facilitate the process—funding planned parenthood, allowing children to circumvent normal parental consent for medical procedures, waiving normal medical safety requirements, etc. —
No other ‘right’ that I am suppose to have (with the possible exception of the right to a fair trial) is facilitated as much by the state. The state won’t buy me guns, even though I have the right to carry them (I don’t mind, I don’t want to own a gun, but I have friends who do); the state won’t buy me a full page ad in the New York Times to express my opinions, etc. —
A politician who claims to be pro-life privately, while working to not only protect the ‘right’ to an abortion, but actually facilitate access is simply not pro-life at all.

Posted by Amy on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 1:14 PM (EST):

I personally know of many people at my parish who pray in front of abortion mills and there’s no fear of bringing up the topic of abortion during a homily. Abortion is the greatest evil probably ever(excluding the crucifixion of our Lord). So called Catholics who say they are personally opposed to abortion but, etc. etc. etc. are a disgrace to the faith.

Posted by JoAnna on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 12:58 PM (EST):

“Here’s the thing - I don’t believe in “personally pro-life.” Not anymore. It just strains credulity. Either you believe it’s the taking of a human life or you don’t. There’s no middle ground. Either you believe in the right to life or you don’t.”

Bingo. That’s the crux of the whole argument right there.

Posted by Maria on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 12:27 PM (EST):

We have a wonderful pro-life bishop in Archbishop Joseph Naumann and he writes and teaches us through our diocesan newspaper. Some of our pastors ane priests, however, say nothing concerning abortion or any other moral issue. In their homilies they speak platitudes about God’s love, which makes it seem as though love is a one-way street. What comprises our love for God and one another is left unsaid. It grieves many of us, and although we have made our wishes known about this, nothing really changes.

Posted by TRS on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 11:37 AM (EST):

Not sure why but this reminds me of my first year of journalism school.
Our professor was discussing interview skills and tactics… and was leading up to the lesson that sometimes you have to escalate the conversation - make someone mad - to get the genuine answer out of them. He wanted to give an example, and had one in mind but said, “Well, for this to work we’d need someone who is pro-life.” He said it as if - in a State University, filled with educated people, journalism students no-less - it would be impossible that ONE OF THOSE would be present!
It only took me a second to say, “I’m pro-life.”
He looked a bit shocked, and a little apologetic because he knew what he was going to do.
He warmed up the argument, the “how can you make the decision for something so private…. for a personal issue?!!!”
I wish I could remember the details but this was more than 20 years ago… But I remember getting very warm, very spun up… and I shouted something like, “But it’s not a personal issue. It’s a human issue! ”

That’s when he backed off. Not because I made a great point… but because he got the passionate answer from me that he was looking for .... and I think he didn’t want to press me or embarrass me.

As a young 20-year old… I don’t know if I was the only pro-life student in that class - I doubt that I was - but I was the one who would stand up and admit it - and maybe I spoke for the others in the class who weren’t brave enough to go against the flow.
Specifically because the professor presented the issue as if there would be no one to argue the pro-life side.
Not to sound corny, but I’m still proud of myself for that.

Posted by mallys on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 11:21 AM (EST):

@ George What you said + for many of these voters, the little “d” after the name is more important than any agenda. They are blindly following something their grandparents and great-grandparents fought for, not seeing that the substance of what they fought for has been sucked out, leaving only death of body, mind and spirit. They think that “the preferential option for the poor” means maiming poor women and murdering their children.

Posted by GHU on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 11:10 AM (EST):

Thanks Mr. Archbold for another great accurate article. Rachel & Eileen seem to think we should “leave the priests out of this issue” What? The Bishops & Priests are supposed to be leading everyone to heaven, not to be politically correct. For too long these “personally pro-life” politicians have voted in laws that promote and subsidize the abortion industry. Their voting records are public knowledge and give scandal to the Church. Kathleen Sebelius for instance cannot receive communion in her Kansas diocese because of a heroic Archbishop.

If we are ever going to defeat abortion in this country (and around the world) we need the Pope, Bishops, Priests, Deacons and religious to speak up, defend and teach the truth about what the Catholic Church believes on abortion and other moral issues; and, yes, we should also write letters and vote accordingly.

Posted by Thomas on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 11:04 AM (EST):

Pray for a change of heart for those who deceive. Love and pray. Doc

Posted by CGS on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 11:01 AM (EST):

Watch this Evangelical change the minds of personally pro-life people and pro-choice people. This is what should be coming out of every Catholic person, but there are too many who fail to speak. Anyway, this guy has a powerful message;

People who say these things wish only to deceive. They are pro-abortion, often radically so.

The purpose of this tactic is to give an out to principled voters who want to support their overall agendas, but are opposed (or feel they should be opposed) to abortion. Such voters are invited to deceive themselves and vote for the pro-abortion politicians falsely believing they are good people, opposed to abortion but who are forced to be pragmatic. Besides, the rest of their agenda is so compellingly attractive…

Posted by Mary on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 9:48 AM (EST):

Thank you for writing this!

40 Days for Life starts today, FYI. :)

Posted by Eileen on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 9:35 AM (EST):

Rachel - Here, here! I love your advice to leave the priests out of this issue of admonishing ‘personally pro-lifers’ at the Communion rail. We don’t know what is in the heart of any person presenting themselves for Communion, but God does. I was once ‘pro-choice’ but through the intercession of somebody - God, Blessed mother, members of the Communion of Saints? - I have come around. I pray for others to follow this path…

Posted by Rachel W. on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 8:54 AM (EST):

@Phil - Please do not bring our priests (regardless of their rank) into this discussion. While there is truth in what you say - let’s just leave them out of it. We know the Blessed Mother is watching over these sons of hers and we can add our prayers for them with hers. We cannot know either the challenge or pain of their positions and office.

BUT, we do know the responsibility of our own ‘office’ as voters. Let’s continue to write those letters and vote against them while supporting completely any truly pro-life candidates we encounter.

Posted by Phil on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 8:21 AM (EST):

Is there a bishop or priest denying Holy Communion to these phonies? It’s one thing to talk or to write letters. Where is the Church’s use of the canonical penalty prescribed for public support of abortion?

Posted by Thomas on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 8:18 AM (EST):

Of course we agree . Will they be determined both soul and spirit perhaps one in the same to have measurable antanomical matter . If that is the case it could be the answer to divine intervention. God bless Dr Thomas

Posted by Mary De Voe on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 8:10 AM (EST):

@Dr. Thomas: The soul is willed into existence through the will of God and endowed with virginity, innocence, virtue, personhood, sovereignty, free will, intellect, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness and grace by our Creator…from the Declaration of Independence. The fact that the human being is brought into concupiscence at conception also points to the fact that all endowed gifts are also present at conception.

Posted by Martin Soy on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 8:09 AM (EST):

Quite simply, they are frauds. Cardinall Arsinze is right - aborttion is death.

Posted by Christina on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 7:41 AM (EST):

You put Pelosi twice in your list of catholyc pols. Is there another one we should be worried about?

Posted by Thomas on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 7:33 AM (EST):

Here in Massachucetts there are many Democrats who talk pro choice but in there hearts they are really pro life. terrible hypocrisy to get yourself elected. Then they wish to save crimonals from capital punishement but choose to kill the child in the Mothers womb. How sad Dr Thomas

Posted by maureen on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 7:02 AM (EST):

I don’t know how anyone who uses this rationale to hide behind, “personally pro-life but not willing to go out-on-a-limb” can sleep at night? I would love to be allowed to have a lengthy discussion with any one of these politicians to dig deeper. We’re not discussing off-shore drilling, it’s a human life that we’re talking about. If you can’t go out-on-a-limb for that one, what can you rightfully defend?

Cowards! All of them.

Posted by Bill G on Wednesday, Sep 28, 2011 2:56 AM (EST):

Then there’s my favorite, “I am adamantly opposed to abortion, but I think it should be left up to the states.”

So, abortion in murder in Kansas, but not in Massachusetts?

Sorry, Congressman Paul, I don’t consider that pro life.

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.